Will never happen. He is a huge chip in any large trade that they would hope to pull off. That would only diminish his value.

That is why i also think that fingernail injury is bull because they just wanted a different pairing for the Flyers but at the same time couldn't make him a healthy scratch anymore so that his value wouldn't go down after the games against Montreal and Tampa.

Gaucho wrote:Why would they fabricate an excuse not to play him? They can make him a healthy scratch as often as they please.

If he continues to play in roughly 75% of the gamesI have no complaints. Even though I'd rather he played every game, but that is more due to shiny new toy syndrome than anything else the fact that he is significantly better than Deryk Engelland.

Gaucho wrote:Why would they fabricate an excuse not to play him? They can make him a healthy scratch as often as they please.

If he continues to play in roughly 75% of the gamesI have no complaints. Even though I'd rather he played every game, but that is more due to shiny new toy syndrome than anything else the fact that he is significantly better than Deryk Engelland.

Gaucho wrote:Why would they fabricate an excuse not to play him? They can make him a healthy scratch as often as they please.

If he continues to play in roughly 75% of the gamesI have no complaints. Even though I'd rather he played every game, but that is more due to shiny new toy syndrome than anything else the fact that he is significantly better than Deryk Engelland.

fixt

Yes, he is. But I stand by my original statement.

Totally within your right. You might be 100% correct. We truly don't know what DB is thinking when it comes to his roster choices.

Bioshock wrote:Having him be a healthy scratch reduces his value in the eyes of another team, that's why.

I don't believe that for a second. He's a young player. I don't think he should be scratched, but his tape more speaks more than loudly on his behalf if we wanted to trade him. If another GM was in the market for a young D with size, great skating, effective body work, great vision and PP potential then I can't think of too many others in the league who would measure up against him. His positioning will improve over time and he is a top pair guy at his peak.

I would also say that there should be NO consideration to trading him anyway, so hopefully that point is moot.

Despres has nothing to gain from playing in the AHL. Even this season he wasn't a dominate force in the minors. He seems to be the type that play better when he is with better teammates and playing against better competition. He has little to gain from playing against slower, less talented opposition. Decision making in the NHL isn't going to improve by playing against scrubs.

It's a compressed schedule, which makes the game physically tougher on players, especially players without experience. It's better for Simon to sit one out every once in a while than to go down for two months with a knee injury.

sil wrote:It's a compressed schedule, which makes the game physically tougher on players, especially players without experience. It's better for Simon to sit one out every once in a while than to go down for two months with a knee injury.

If it's for a rental, I agree. But if it brings back a player who will be in Pittsburgh for a while, I have no problem with it. The fact is, some of the forwards are getting a little older. You've gotta figure Dupuis and Cooke won't play forever, and TK will likely not be back or end up traded. So there's some money that will be free in the not too distant future to sign whomever they trade for.

If it's for a rental, I agree. But if it brings back a player who will be in Pittsburgh for a while, I have no problem with it. The fact is, some of the forwards are getting a little older. You've gotta figure Dupuis and Cooke won't play forever, and TK will likely not be back or end up traded. So there's some money that will be free in the not too distant future to sign whomever they trade for.

I get your point here, but trading Despres for a permanent fixture doesn't really equate money-wise. He's only making just over $800K right now, and will have a rather reasonable cap hit for the next 3-4 years at least, while serving as a top-4 D-man. That's the kind of contract you absolutely must have if you're going to realistically resign Malkin and Letang for the long term.

If it's for a rental, I agree. But if it brings back a player who will be in Pittsburgh for a while, I have no problem with it. The fact is, some of the forwards are getting a little older. You've gotta figure Dupuis and Cooke won't play forever, and TK will likely not be back or end up traded. So there's some money that will be free in the not too distant future to sign whomever they trade for.

I get your point here, but trading Despres for a permanent fixture doesn't really equate money-wise. He's only making just over $800K right now, and will have a rather reasonable cap hit for the next 3-4 years at least, while serving as a top-4 D-man. That's the kind of contract you absolutely must have if you're going to realistically resign Malkin and Letang for the long term.

If you think Niskanen, Kennedy and or Jeffrey can get you what you want, okay. But if you're looking to add a real, young scoring threat to move into Kunitz's or Dupuis' spot in a year or two, then you may have to sacrifice Despres (or Letang). Right now, I'd rather keep Letang.

If it's for a rental, I agree. But if it brings back a player who will be in Pittsburgh for a while, I have no problem with it. The fact is, some of the forwards are getting a little older. You've gotta figure Dupuis and Cooke won't play forever, and TK will likely not be back or end up traded. So there's some money that will be free in the not too distant future to sign whomever they trade for.

I get your point here, but trading Despres for a permanent fixture doesn't really equate money-wise. He's only making just over $800K right now, and will have a rather reasonable cap hit for the next 3-4 years at least, while serving as a top-4 D-man. That's the kind of contract you absolutely must have if you're going to realistically resign Malkin and Letang for the long term.

If it's for a rental, I agree. But if it brings back a player who will be in Pittsburgh for a while, I have no problem with it. The fact is, some of the forwards are getting a little older. You've gotta figure Dupuis and Cooke won't play forever, and TK will likely not be back or end up traded. So there's some money that will be free in the not too distant future to sign whomever they trade for.

I get your point here, but trading Despres for a permanent fixture doesn't really equate money-wise. He's only making just over $800K right now, and will have a rather reasonable cap hit for the next 3-4 years at least, while serving as a top-4 D-man. That's the kind of contract you absolutely must have if you're going to realistically resign Malkin and Letang for the long term.

If you think Niskanen, Kennedy and or Jeffrey can get you what you want, okay. But if you're looking to add a real, young scoring threat to move into Kunitz's or Dupuis' spot in a year or two, then you may have to sacrifice Despres (or Letang). Right now, I'd rather keep Letang.

The last thing we need right now is another scoring threat. Maybe summer, not now.

What we need to get better shouldn't require trading Despres and I'm against it.